Sunday Downtime - All Evolve Media Sites are being migrated to a new data center Sunday Dec 11, 2016. The migration will occur during an 8 AM to 2 PM (Pacific Time) maintenance window. We will have up to 1 hour of downtime for any of our sites.

Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Getting a team to assume a 5.3M cap hit for a player who will not perform at that cap hit [we all know it will happen but when] and to take a dead space cape hit when he retires for multiple years and saying "see that makes up for the 1.5M cap saving for the 3-5 years he potentially saves the team short term".

I'm sorry but that doesn't equate.

So why is 5 years of saving 1.5 million/per now any worse than losing 3 years of 2 mil per 7 years in the future?(assuming, for arguments sake he plays worth his cap hit in year 6)?

What about the years where Luongo is getting paid 5.3M on the cap but playing below that? [potentially even when in real dollars Luongo is getting paid 6.7M] That's a penalty for those assuming the contract.

Now they have to pay out the previous advantage as well?

Clearly doesn't make this a fair deal.

It's a penalty to a team assuming a contract when a player doesn't play up to his salary/cap-hit? Does this apply to other players that don't perform up their cap-hit/salary? If it's the same, the point is moot.

The team getting him would get a 5-6 year cap advantage, roughly, and a 3-4 year penalty. They are still getting more years at advantage than they are disadvantage. Make sense?

Can someone explain to me why Florida is even in the mix? I mean they already have a solid starter in Theodore. They also have Markstrom who is as close as close can be to NHL ready and he has star potential. Why would Florida take on that contract when they don't even need him? It makes ZERO sense.

I think Toronto values the second package quite a bit higher than the first.

I'm certainly open to the Leafs keeping Bozak due to chemistry if Vancouver doesn't value him too highly. What about substituting Bozak out for a 2nd rounder or a futures value comparable to Bozak's?

Say:

Kadri
Finn
Franson
2nd

for

Luongo

Meh, I value Bozak more than a 2nd, though. Maybe a 2014 1st? I'd like one established roster player, though, and Kulemin would be a better fit than Bozak. Given that the Leafs just acquired JVR, it might make Kulemin more expendable.

I'd also be okay with something like Kadri, Finn, Frattin, 2nd.(I see Frattin as a downgrade from Kulemin, who i'd still prefer)

The team getting him would get a 5-6 year cap advantage, roughly, and a 3-4 year penalty. They are still getting more years at advantage than they are disadvantage. Make sense?

And on that point, my last, I see where some of the separation begins.

At 5.3M I can only imagine Luongo being a discount on that figure for 3-4 years MAX. He may match that figure but by no means perform better then it. Thus I see him declining somewhat around 36/37 from elite status.

With that being considered, 3-4 years of advantage, maybe 2-3 years of debatable market value leaves about 4 years where he will perform below that cap hit. Say he retires before the contract is over so 3 years. Plus 3-4 years of a dead cap space penalty and you have about 6 years where the cap hit versus his ability would be a detriment versus 3-4 years of real value.

Meh, I value Bozak more than a 2nd, though. Maybe a 2014 1st? I'd like one established roster player, though, and Kulemin would be a better fit than Bozak. Given that the Leafs just acquired JVR, it might make Kulemin more expendable.

I'd also be okay with something like Kadri, Finn, Frattin, 2nd.(I see Frattin as a downgrade from Kulemin, who i'd still prefer)

I honestly don't think it makes Kulemin more expendable because the rationale for getting Van Reimsdyk IIRC was that we needed more players of that type.

The bottom I think is good value but the issue is it opens a hole on the 3rd line and in the forward prospect department (which is sadly a weak spot of Toronto's prospect pool). If Biggs were more ready I doubt it would be as much of an issue to move Kadri and Frattin.

I'd sooner move Biggs + something small than Frattin to be honest. Is that an option?

So what does your other option amount to? Kadri, Finn, Franson, 1st 2014? Or was it Kadri, Finn, 2nd 2013, 1st 2014?

It seems like we're getting close in value although Burke may not want to pay that much. It all depends on his confidence in Reimer. If Burke and Carlyle truly believe that Reimer will become a very good goalie very soon (I think he will be and from their interviews they seem to like him a lot) and a solid veteran backup is available for a decent price, that would likely be a better option for Burkie than giving up that much future.

Guess we'll see what he thinks soon enough. I'm honestly not sure how this will play out but it would be nice to see top notch goaltending in Toronto again.

And on that point, my last, I see where some of the separation begins.

At 5.3M I can only imagine Luongo being a discount on that figure for 3-4 years MAX. He may match that figure but by no means perform better then it. Thus I see him declining somewhat around 36/37 from elite status.

With that being considered, 3-4 years of advantage, maybe 2-3 years of debatable market value leaves about 4 years where he will perform below that cap hit. Say he retires before the contract is over so 3 years. Plus 3-4 years of a dead cap space penalty and you have about 6 years where the cap hit versus his ability would be a detriment versus 3-4 years of real value.

Not what I would consider fair or not even the slightest problem.

Ok, so that's where we disagree. I see 5-6 years of high end play.

Even in your scenario, it's 3-4 years of high end play, 1-2 years at fair play (because there will be a transition phase), and 3-4 on the decline with him retiring in the 1st or 2nd year of this last section (likely), that's still 1-2 years of play _at_ his cap hit. Not below.

Now this all depends on salary/cap-hit values increase in the new CBA. They've limited long-term length to 8 years, so in order for better players to get accurate salary, the cap-hits will be higher than what we have known on average. Kypreos has said as much on the FAN590 (today in fact). He gets it. Thus, it could be that 5.3m cap hit is seen as _very_ favourable as we go on here. But time will tell.